monzaman Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Is it not immoral to prevent someone from returning to their work once they have done their time? Very good post charmer,agree fully!!!!! ---------- Post added 12-11-2014 at 18:13 ---------- there should be a bar, football is a privilige not a right, if you abuse that privilige then you lose it theres plenty of careers out there he can do to rehabilitate, it doesnt have to be one that puts you in the public eye, that kids aspire to become and get thousands or millions for doing Plus of course,the fact the club happens to be sheffield united:roll::roll: ---------- Post added 12-11-2014 at 18:16 ---------- No. It is reasonable for any business to bar people from employment who will bring the organisation into disrepute. The disrepute is not so much for what he did but what he continues to do i.e. argue that having sex with zonked out strangers is not rape. This is not what the law says, it is morally wrong and no business should employ someone who expresses such views... especially when the will be in a position to act as a role model for others. here we go again ,role model for others,wayne rooney,ryan giggs....the list goes on and on,role models....yeah right:roll: ---------- Post added 12-11-2014 at 18:16 ---------- It must be annoying for someone who expects to get his way to now find out that the club ignored him. So he throws a tantrum and writes an open letter. IMO, an open letter says more about the person writing it than it does about the actual subject. Another very good post!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I assumed your point was that he should not be able to play football. This is different to a particular company (sheffield united) choosing not to employ him, which they are morally entitled to do. As long as you think that there should be no legal bar to him playing for any club that wants him, we are on the same page. It is up to SUFC to decide who it employs but it is ultimately the FA that decides who can play. The FA recently said they would consider banning players for life for racism and I think they should also consider an equally tough stance against players who argue rape is OK. SUFC has already shamed itself by even considering the putting aside of morality for potential goals. It is time they woke up to their error of judgement and disassociate themselves from an advocate of rape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedy69 Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 United shirt sponsors now threaten to pull out if Ched returns. http://www.itv.com/news/calendar/update/2014-11-12/blades-sponsors-threaten-to-pull-out-over-evans-situation/ Rats leaving a sinking ship springs to mind! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monzaman Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 It is up to SUFC to decide who it employs but it is ultimately the FA that decides who can play. The FA recently said they would consider banning players for life for racism and I think they should also consider an equally tough stance against players who argue rape is OK. SUFC has already shamed itself by even considering the putting aside of morality for potential goals. It is time they woke up to their error of judgement and disassociate themselves from an advocate of rape. But don't let the fact they are doing nothing illegal come into it:roll: ---------- Post added 12-11-2014 at 18:22 ---------- United shirt sponsors now threaten to pull out if Ched returns. http://www.itv.com/news/calendar/update/2014-11-12/blades-sponsors-threaten-to-pull-out-over-evans-situation/ Rats leaving a sinking ship springs to mind! I see the usual s6 suspects are loving this,which is why it is being dragged out so much:roll: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libuse Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 here we go again ,role model for others,wayne rooney,ryan giggs....the list goes on and on,role models....yeah right:roll: I don't think either have those have got a criminal record though, have they? Currently, it would be a breach of the FA's own rules for him to work as a match day steward with that record, but it's ok for him to play? "Player" needs adding to the long list of roles within football that you just can't do with a record for a violent criminal offence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedy69 Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 But don't let the fact they are doing nothing illegal come into it:roll: ---------- Post added 12-11-2014 at 18:22 ---------- I see the usual s6 suspects are loving this,which is why it is being dragged out so much:roll: Care to comment on the link Monza? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monzaman Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Where is it that he will train with the squad?, it is assumed that because he is using the facilities at the request of the PFA he is training with the squad. Nowhere in any statement has it said he will train with the players, all the press can see is another story to twist the truth with. The PFA who represent all players made a request for him to use the facilities, this will be done at various times and places when the squad are not there. Any issues should be taken up with them. They wont be happy till bramall lane is burnt to the ground and all united fans shot!!!!!!!!!! ---------- Post added 12-11-2014 at 18:27 ---------- Care to comment on the link Monza? I will leave it to the usual s6 suspects to comment,they seem to be doing it a lot at the moment:roll: ---------- Post added 12-11-2014 at 18:29 ---------- I don't think either have those have got a criminal record though, have they? Currently, it would be a breach of the FA's own rules for him to work as a match day steward with that record, but it's ok for him to play? "Player" needs adding to the long list of roles within football that you just can't do with a record for a violent criminal offence So now we are on about his criminal record,i thought we were on about it being morally wrong for him to play......make your mind up!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Plus of course,the fact the club happens to be sheffield united:roll::roll: change the record i dont care what team he plays for, rape is rape. theres plenty of unitedites that dont want him there either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monzaman Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 change the record i dont care what team he plays for, rape is rape. theres plenty of unitedites that dont want him there either And you change the record ,we all know the real reason you and others will NOT let this drop!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 But don't let the fact they are doing nothing illegal come into it:roll: If SUFC want to employ an advocate of rape because they put goals before morality then that is up to them. It is however up to others whether they want to do business with a club with no morals and it is up to the FA to decide whether to ban a player who advocates rape. Obviously you are happy to overlook someone advocating rape if it gets goals for your club and you are entitled to your view as others are entitled to point out how shallow, selfish and shameful your view is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts